Criminal Law - Default Bail - Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita 2023 - Section 187(3) - Right to statutory bail - Non-filing of additional copies of chargesheet under Section 193(8) - Appellant was arrested on 13.07.2025 for allegedly providing logistical support to a cybercrime syndicate using mule accounts for digital extortion and money laundering - Investigating agency filed the police report/chargesheet on 02.09.2025 within the statutory period prescribed under Section 187(3) BNSS - Appellant filed for default bail on 17.09.2025 contending that the chargesheet was incomplete because copies and indexed documents were not filed or supplied within the 60/90 day period - Special Judge CBI Greater Mumbai dismissed the plea holding that non-supply of copies does not entitle an accused to default bail - Bombay High Court affirmed this in revision holding that the benefit of default bail arises only upon the failure to file the main chargesheet - Supreme Court analyzed the transition from CrPC to BNSS - Held - The right to default bail is an indefeasible right under Article 21 of the Constitution of India but it is a conditional one that extinguishes once a chargesheet complying with Section 193(3) is filed within the time limit - Non-filing of additional copies under Section 193(8) or non-compliance with the supply timeline under Section 230 does not vitiate the police report or invalidate the investigation - The procedural requirement to supply copies is intended for the commencement of trial and does not revive the right to default bail - Appeal dismissed - [Paras 1-30].

Criminal Law - Interpretation of Statutes - Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita 2023 - Sections 193 and 230 - Directory vs Mandatory - Procedure for filing police report - Comparison with Section 173 and 207 of CrPC - Prosecution filed the report within the time limit but delayed providing indexed copies for the accused - Held - Provisions governing the supply of documents to the accused are directory and not mandatory in the context of completing the investigation - Once the Court is satisfied regarding the commission of an offence and takes cognizance the pendency of further investigation or production of non-essential documents does not entitle the accused to default bail - Legal principles established under the erstwhile CrPC regarding the finality of police reports continue to apply to corresponding sections of the BNSS - [Paras 19-27].

Decision: Appeal dismissed – Impugned order of the Bombay High Court affirmed – Appellant’s regular bail application to be considered on its own merits independently.

Civil Law - Compromise Decree - Code of Civil Procedure 1908 - Order XXIII Rule 3 - Validity of Consent Decree - Appellants challenged orders setting aside a 1994 compromise decree - LRs of Defendant No. 5 moved application in 2022 alleging fraud as the compromise lacked Defendant No. 5 signature and was signed by a lawyer without express authority - Trial Court and High Court set aside the decree noting procedural illegality - Supreme Court observed that post-1976 amendment a compromise must be in writing and signed by the parties to prevent frivolous pleas - Held - A compromise decree not signed by all parties is a mandate of law and failure to comply renders the compromise contrary to law - appeal dismissed - [Paras 1-5.2].

Civil Law - Advocate Authority - Code of Civil Procedure 1908 - Order XXIII Rule 3 - Express vs Implied Authority - Dispute regarding counsel signing a compromise petition without specific authorization from the client - Record showed no express power in the vakalatnama nor exigent circumstances justifying the counsel's action - Court emphasized that an advocate represents the client and must follow instructions rather than substitute judgment - Held - Counsel generally has no implied or apparent authority to make statements surrendering substantial legal rights of a client in the absence of express authorization - voluntary aspect of compromise not established - [Paras 5.3-5.6].

Civil Law - Delay and Limitation - Code of Civil Procedure 1908 - Section 151 - Inherent Powers - Setting aside decree after 25 years - Appellants argued that the long gap between 1994 and 2022 should bar the application - Trial Court found that knowledge of the fraud was recent and limitation cannot perpetuate an illegality - Supreme Court held that while limitation is a facet of the legal system it cannot be used to defeat substantive rights - Especially where fraud is alleged and basic facts are contested - Held - Delay of 25 years given a go-by to ensure due process and trial on merits - [Paras 6.1-7].

Decision: Appeal dismissed – The orders setting aside the compromise decree are affirmed – The partition suit is directed to be adjudicated through a full trial.

Criminal Law - Remission Policy - Constitution of India - Article 161 - Code of Criminal Procedure 1973 - Section 432 - Appellant convicted for murder on 03.01.2009 - applied for remission under liberal 2002 Haryana Policy after serving 14 years - State rejected application citing 2008 Policy which required 20 years actual imprisonment - High Court dismissed writ petition based on the judgment in State of Haryana v. Raj Kumar - Supreme Court analyzed the source of power for the 2002 and 2008 policies - found 2002 policy banked on Article 161 while 2008 policy was statutory under Section 432 CrPC - compared 2002 policy with 1993 policy addressed in State of Haryana v. Jagdish - Held - the 2002 policy is constitutional in nature and cannot be deterred or superseded by the subsequent statutory policy of 2008 - observation that 2008 policy supersedes the 2002 policy is untenable in law - appellant entitled to the benefit of the more liberal policy prevailing on the date of conviction or consideration - [Paras 1-18].

Criminal Law - Precedents - Doctrine of Per Incuriam - Constitution of India - Article 141 - Conflict between three-judge bench in Jagdish and two-judge bench in Raj Kumar - Raj Kumar judgment held 2002 policy to be of statutory origin and superseded - Court evaluated rules of stare decisis and exceptions for per incuriam decisions - Held - a judgment is per incuriam when its ratio is not reconcilable with an earlier decision rendered by a bench of higher strength - Raj Kumar finding regarding the 2002 policy falls foul of the reasoning in the larger bench decision of Jagdish - strength of the bench is the determinative factor for the binding nature of a view - [Paras 11-15].

Criminal Law - Remission - Prospective Application - Directions to State - Application of judgment to pending and future cases - Court clarified that findings shall apply prospectively and not reopen already decided remissions - State to recognize two distinct functioning policies - Held - State directed to take a decision on the remission application of the appellant within four weeks consistent with this judgment - [Paras 16-18].

Decision: Appeal allowed - Rejection of remission set aside - State of Haryana directed to decide the appellant's remission application in accordance with the 2002 Policy within four weeks.

Criminal Law - Committal Proceedings - Code of Criminal Procedure 1973 - Section 209 - Recording of evidence by Magistrate before commitment - Altercation led to death of appellant father - Allegations under Section 302 IPC - Case committed to Sessions Court - Sessions Court framed charges against one respondent and discharged others - Complainant and one respondent filed revisions in High Court - High Court remanded matter to Magistrate to comply with Section 244 CrPC requiring recording of prosecution evidence before commitment - Supreme Court observed that the 1973 Code consciously did away with lengthy committal inquiries existing under the 1898 Code - Held - Magistrate is not required to record evidence when the offence is exclusively triable by the Court of Session - High Court order set aside - [Paras 1-15].

Criminal Law - Warrant Cases - Code of Criminal Procedure 1973 - Section 244 - Applicability - High Court relied on precedents involving offences triable by Magistrate to mandate pre-charge evidence for Sessions-triable cases - Supreme Court distinguished cited cases noting they pertained to Magistrate jurisdiction or Section 319 proceedings - Held - Section 244 applies to warrant cases instituted otherwise than on a police report which are triable by the Magistrate and does not apply to cases falling under Section 209 commitment - [Paras 8-9].

Criminal Law - Judicial Duty - Code of Criminal Procedure 1973 - Section 209 - Nature of committal order - Comparison with 1898 Code - Legislative intent for expeditious disposal - Power of Magistrate described as a narrow inspection hole - Magistrate role restricted to ensuring compliance with Sections 207 and 208 and determining if the case is exclusively triable by Sessions - Held - Applying mind to merits or taking evidence at pre-committal stage would frustrate the legislative purpose of the 1973 Code - [Paras 10-12].

Decision: Appeal allowed – Impugned judgment of the High Court set aside – High Court directed to hear the revisions filed by the appellant and respondent no.2 afresh and decide them independently within nine months.

Civil Law - Motor Accident Claims - Motor Vehicles Act 1988 - Sections 166 and 168 - Assessment of annual income for compensation - Evidentiary value of Income Tax Returns - Bifurcation between salaried and self-employed persons - Deceased was a 39-year-old businessman who died in a collision with a truck driven rashly and negligently - FIR registered under Sections 279 and 304A IPC - Claimants sought Rs 2.25 crores compensation - Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (MACT) awarded Rs 2.27 crores by considering the last ITR for Assessment Year 2018-19 showing Rs 15 lakhs income - High Court reduced the amount to Rs 1.87 crores by averaging the last two ITRs on record and reducing the multiplier - Appellants challenged the reduction - Supreme Court noted a lack of uniformity in how Courts use ITRs to assess income - Appointed Amicus Curiae to assist on principles - Held - Objective of the Act is to grant just and fair compensation to restore the aggrieved to the prior position - ITRs are statutory documents and important reference points but compensation determination is not an exact science - For salaried individuals the ITR of the previous year alone is sufficient as it captures the impact of recent promotions - For self-employed individuals or those carrying out business the average income of up to the previous three years should be the reference point to account for profit fluctuations - Surrounding circumstances like nature of business and growth patterns must be considered - Income Tax Returns filed after death must be corroborated by financial statements to ensure they are not inflated - In the present case deceased ran a construction business - Annual income fixed at Rs 14 lakhs after considering ITRs for two years - total compensation modified to Rs 1.97 crores - [Paras 1-25].

Civil Law - Quantum of Compensation - Motor Vehicles Act 1988 - Section 166 - Self-employed professional - Insurance Agent - High Court averaged four previous years of ITRs to calculate income - Supreme Court held that for professions where income depends on performance like insurance agents a hike in certain years is plausible - Held - Taking an excessive number of prior years for averaging may unfairly dilute the assessment of recent earning capacity - Average of previous three years is generally appropriate for professionals - [Paras 10-12 of companion judgment].

Evidence Law - Reliability of Income Tax Returns - Motor Vehicles Act 1988 - Section 168 - Post-death filing of ITRs - Deceased ran a grocery store - Claimants submitted ITRs filed after the death showing significantly higher income compared to pre-death records - High Court excluded the post-death returns - Supreme Court held that the date of filing is a relevant factor to detect potential inflation of income - Held - While post-death ITRs are not automatically inadmissible they require support from surrounding financial statements - In the absence of corroboration Court may fix income based on available records and nature of profession - [Paras 11-13 of companion judgment].

Decision: Civil Appeals allowed – Compensation modified in all cases according to the principles of averaging ITRs for self-employed persons – Respondents directed to remit the enhanced amounts directly to the appellants' bank accounts within four weeks.

Criminal Law - Territorial Jurisdiction - Negotiable Instruments Act 1881 - Section 138 - Appellant filed complaints under Section 138 NI Act at Bhilwara where he maintains a bank account at Kotak Mahindra Bank - High Court of Rajasthan at Jodhpur transferred these complaints to Ajmer because a charge sheet was filed against the appellant in Ajmer under Sections 403 and 417 IPC involving the same subject-matter cheques - Appellant contended that trial had already commenced in 2019 and the transfer petition was filed belatedly in 2022 - Supreme Court noted that the respondent failed to appear despite service - Court observed that it is settled law that jurisdiction for cheques delivered for collection through an account vests in the Court where the payee's home branch is situated - Held - Courts in Bhilwara have exclusive jurisdiction to try the offences - High Court order set aside - appeals allowed - [Paras 2-7].

Criminal Law - Dishonour of Cheque - Negotiable Instruments Act 1881 - Section 138 - Territorial Jurisdiction - Ratio Decidendi - Jurisdiction to try a complaint filed under Section 138 of the NI Act in respect of a cheque delivered for collection through an account is vested in the Court within whose local jurisdiction the branch of the bank in which the payee maintains the account is situated - Supreme Court reaffirmed the principle laid down by the coordinate Bench in Jai Balaji Industries Ltd. v. M/s HEG Ltd. 2025 SCC OnLine SC 2581 - Held - Since the appellant maintains his account in Bhilwara the jurisdiction vests exclusively in the Bhilwara Courts - [Paras 4-6].

Decision: Appeals allowed – Order dated 06th March 2024 passed by the High Court of Judicature for Rajasthan at Jodhpur is set aside – Jurisdiction for the Section 138 NI Act complaints remains with the Courts in Bhilwara.

Criminal Law - Election Fraud - Code of Criminal Procedure 1973 - Section 465 - Irregular Cognizance - Appellant challenged the High Court order refusing to quash proceedings initiated for alleged suppression of her husband's immovable properties in the election affidavit filed for the 2015 Municipal elections - the Magistrate took cognizance and issued process under Section 125A of the Representation of the People Act 1951 - the Appellant contended that RPA is inapplicable to local body elections which are governed by the Gujarat Municipalities Act and state rules - the Court noted that while the RPA did not apply to this election - the requirement to disclose assets was mandated under Rule 7A of the Gujarat Municipalities Rules - the Court observed that although the Magistrate cited the wrong section - Section 465 CrPC protects orders from being reversed due to irregularities unless a failure of justice is occasioned - Held - taking cognizance under an incorrect section is a curable defect if the Magistrate has the power to take cognizance of the offence under the correct provisions - matter remanded for fresh cognizance - [Paras 1-14].

Election Law - Disclosure Requirements - Gujarat Municipalities (Conduct of Elections) Rules 1994 - Rule 7A - Assets of Spouse - Appellant argued that the rules only mandated disclosure of joint properties and not those solely owned by the spouse - the Court analyzed the syntax of the declaration form requiring details of assets of myself my spouse and dependents - the Court interpreted the comma after myself as a listing comma separating distinct categories - Held - a candidate is legally bound to disclose properties held solely by the spouse in addition to joint holdings and self-owned assets - [Paras 8-9].

Criminal Law - Taking Cognizance - Code of Criminal Procedure 1973 - Section 190 - Judicial Mind - the Court examined the definition and scope of cognizance based on various precedents - it was reiterated that cognizance is taken of the offence and not the offender or the specific section mentioned in the complaint - the judicial act of taking cognizance occurs when a Magistrate applies the mind to the suspected commission of an offence - Held - an error in the label of the section does not vitiate the proceedings at the threshold if the underlying facts constitute an offence under another valid law - [Paras 10-12].

Criminal Law - Limitation - Code of Criminal Procedure 1973 - Sections 468 and 469 - Filing False Affidavit - the Respondent-Complainant argued that since the allegations involved offences under Sections 192 and 193 IPC which carry a punishment of seven years - the bar of limitation under Section 468 CrPC would not apply - the Court noted the State Election Commission's directions authorizing Returning Officers to file complaints for misleading information - Held - filing a false affidavit in the electoral process is an offence against society at large and requires proper investigation under the correct penal provisions - [Paras 5-6 and 14].

Decision: Appeal disposed of – Order of the High Court modified – Matter remanded to the Magistrate concerned to take cognizance afresh under the correct provisions of law – Magistrate directed to proceed as per law without expressing opinion on the merits.

Criminal Law - Culpable Homicide - Indian Penal Code 1860 - Section 304 Part II and Section 34 - Incident occurred in 1997 involving an altercation over a defective watch sold by the deceased to one of the accused - Scuffle ensued near the edge of a dry canal with a rocky bed - Accused allegedly pushed the deceased into the canal - Prosecution witnesses claimed the appellant struck the deceased with a heavy stone - Post-mortem revealed extensive head injuries including compound comminuted fracture of the skull and lacerated wounds - Trial Court and High Court convicted the accused under Section 304 IPC and sentenced them to five years rigorous imprisonment - Two co-accused died during the pendency of the appeal - Surviving appellant Mathu alias Jagdish aged over sixty years - Held - Nature of injuries recorded in the post-mortem report indicates they were likely caused by the abrupt fall into the rocky canal rather than by stones thrown with human force - Scenario of causing death by throwing stones found not plausible - Finding that Section 304 Part II IPC is applicable as the act was done with knowledge but without intention to cause death - Considering the incident is nearly thirty years old and the appellant has already served over eighteen months in prison the sentence is modified to the period already undergone while maintaining the conviction - [Paras 1-18].

Evidence Law - Ocular Testimony vs Medical Evidence - Indian Penal Code 1860 - Section 304 - Conflict between eyewitness claims and physical injuries - PW-2 and PW-3 testified that the appellant threw stones hitting the deceased on the head - Post-mortem showed brain cavity deep lacerations and comminuted fractures - Investigating Officer seized one stone but no forensic report was exhibited - Court observed that the nature and extent of the head injuries were only consistent with a fall onto a rock bed - Held - Prosecution accusation regarding stone throwing as the cause of fatal injury is not plausible when viewed against the medical findings - Conviction sustained on the basis of the push leading to the fall during the scuffle - [Paras 7-11].

Decision: Criminal Appeal allowed in part – Conviction maintained – Sentence modified to the period of imprisonment already undergone – Bail bonds discharged.

Civil Law - Motor Accident Claim - Motor Vehicles Act 1988 - Enhancement of compensation - Appellant carpenter aged 38 years suffered 70 percent medical disability due to amputation of right leg in a vehicular accident - Motor Accident Claims Tribunal awarded Rs 477823 - High Court enhanced award to Rs 1151423 - Appellant sought further enhancement before Supreme Court - Court observed that functional disability must be assessed in the context of the victims occupation - For a carpenter who requires the ability to sit squat and stand without support the loss of a leg results in 100 percent functional disability regardless of a lower medical percentage - Notional income for a skilled artisan increased from Rs 5000 to Rs 9000 per month - Multiplier of 15 applied - Future prospects at 40 percent added as per Pranay Sethi - Held - Total compensation enhanced to Rs 3595923 with 6 percent interest per annum - [Paras 1-11].

Civil Law - Skilled Worker Status - Notional Income - Artisan - Carpentry - The Court analyzed the definition of an artisan as one skilled in a trade requiring manual dexterity - Carpentry identified as a skilled job and an industrial art - Held - It is unfair to classify a carpenter as an unskilled worker for compensation purposes - Notional income must reflect the potentiality of a skilled job to fetch higher earnings - Income assessed at Rs 9000 per month to strike a balance between claims and prevalent minimum wages - [Paras 5.2-5.3.2].

Civil Law - Functional Disability vs Medical Disability - Occupational Impact - Medical certificate assessed physical impairment at 70 percent - Appellant contended disability is 100 percent for his trade - Court held that functional disability is what is felt by the injured in their day-to-day avocation - An injury rendering a person incapable of performing their specific work leads to 100 percent functional disability - Held - Since the appellant can no longer sit in a squatted or cross-legged manner essential for carpentry his earning capacity is totally eclipsed - [Paras 5.6-5.7.6].

Civil Law - Future Medical Expenses - Prosthetic Leg - Restoration of Position - Court noted that amputation has long-term repercussions requiring artificial limbs that need periodic replacement and maintenance - Average life expectancy of 75 years requires at least six replacements for a 38-year-old claimant - Held - Award of Rs 1000000 granted towards the cost and lifetime maintenance of a prosthetic leg to restore the injured as nearly as possible to the position prior to the accident - [Paras 5.9-5.9.3].

Decision: Appeal allowed - Total compensation enhanced to Rs 35,95,923 with 6% p.a. interest - Respondent No. 1 directed to deposit additional amount within six weeks.